So, here’s the thing. I have this setting I’ve been working on for years now. And the setting ended up with almost 5000 years of extensive lore, and you need to be familiar with several different philosophies and cultures to understand any of it. I was trying to come up with some names for characters in a story I am writing in said setting. And when I was researching how names and languages change I was struck with a thought. Am I overcomplicating this? Do I really need an explanation why there is a guy named “Al Banian” and why the name is actually a remnant from a completely different reality? I’m getting to the point where the lore is so complex it starts to sound stupid if you don’t know all the details. Case and point, a guy named “Al Banian”.
Another example. There are several creation myths, and three of them are technically correct.
I need some advice. Feel free to ask questions.
My man, didn’t I literally say “No offense,”? I’m pretty sure I did.
And I’m pretty sure Chauncer and Shakespeare won’t outlive me, since they already died.
But whatever, this is a discussion about a single perceived misuse of a single word. And at this point I’m getting confused. So, do you agree it was a lute or not? This is what the discussion is about (I think). At least that was my intention from the start. Because I distinctly remember this little story about Emperor Nero having a lute in it, not a fiddle. Although there are versions of the story that say it was a cithara. And a cithara isn’t either a lute or a fiddle.
Also. The article you linked kind of makes it sound like it isn’t talking about an instrument at all. Maybe, possibly, Nero fiddled his diddle while Rome burned. There’s still an instrument involved, just not a musical one. Not conventionally anyway.
And no. I’m not reading the whole article. Not because I don’t care enough to do so (although that is true, I don’t), but because I don’t have the attention span to read an article about a misqote of a fake story.
And again, no offense. I mean what I say as literally as I can. I am terrible at speaking to people. And honest. People don’t like that, usually. As a token of friendship, please accept this funny picture of a drink that I have found (I found the picture, not the drink).
I really don’t know how else to diffuse the situation. 🙂
First, no it wouldn’t have been a lute. They weren’t invented until the 13th century, if he was playing an instrument it would have been a lyre or cithara; possibly a pandura. None of this matters, however, because my original sentiment still stands. We know Nero wasn’t fiddling while Rome burned.
Second,
It is the third paragraph.
Pedantry is not a virtue, especially when you’re totally incorrect about what you’re correcting. I would invite you to read more history.
Lutes were invented in the bronze age…
Edit: I’m pretty sure the bronze age was before Nero was born. Although I am not 100% sure. More like 99.9995%?
Edit 2: Actually lyre also sounds right. Now I’m doubting the version I heard. But it was definitely NOT a fiddle that Nero was not playing.
This has been your lesson on how history gets muddied and how, despite fiddles not existing, the fiddle became associated with Nero.
Also, I sincerely doubt Romans would have been playing on ancient Mesopotamian lutes. The European lute was adapted from the oud in Europe somewhere around the 13th century.
Was it a lesson? I guess, because I learned something.
I asked the person who first told me this fake news about Nero. Turns out it really was a lyre, and I did misremember.
And lutes really were invented before 3000 BC. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lute Not just in ancient Mesopotamia. Egypt and Greece too. And many other places. Before Rome was evem built. It wasn’t invented just once. Just like language.
So yes, maybe I wasn’t right, but at least I don’t have to admit you were right the whole time. Can we just call it a draw?
No you absolutely weren’t right, you tried to correct my statement (paraphrasing) of ‘We know Nero wasn’t fiddling’ with ‘Actually we know Nero wasn’t fiddling because fiddles weren’t invented’. You literally proved my statement while trying to say I was wrong.
Not to mention, the link you provided indeed states that evidence points to their existence in 3000 BC - in ancient Mesopotamia. Their earliest known existence. From which spread to Egypt and Greece, specifically Greece in the form of the pandura. The only thing I’m technically wrong about here is assuming ancient Greece isn’t a part of Europe, because the Greeks themselves didn’t identify as European. They actually invented the term.
You need to actually read. I’m not interested in continuing to give you history lessons.
I never tried to prove you wrong. I was just correcting WHY we know that. We know he wasn’t fiddling, because the fiddle wasn’t invented yet. If he was playing anything (and he wasn’t) then it would’ve been a lyre or a lute. This is all I wanted to say.
Explain how this is a ‘correction’ to this.
Of course. The correct version would be: “Do we know that Nero wasn’t actually playing the lyre while Rome burned? Yes.”